From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Jul 15 15:18:54 2005 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B498716A420 for ; Fri, 15 Jul 2005 15:18:54 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from scottl@samsco.org) Received: from pooker.samsco.org (pooker.samsco.org [168.103.85.57]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E322C43D53 for ; Fri, 15 Jul 2005 15:18:49 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from scottl@samsco.org) Received: from [192.168.254.14] (imini.samsco.home [192.168.254.14]) (authenticated bits=0) by pooker.samsco.org (8.13.3/8.13.3) with ESMTP id j6FFNlUO084552; Fri, 15 Jul 2005 09:23:47 -0600 (MDT) (envelope-from scottl@samsco.org) Message-ID: <42D7D3DA.20106@samsco.org> Date: Fri, 15 Jul 2005 09:18:50 -0600 From: Scott Long User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; PPC Mac OS X Mach-O; en-US; rv:1.7.7) Gecko/20050416 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "Marc G. Fournier" References: <42D79676.6040606@samsco.org> <20050715115650.I66818@ganymede.hub.org> In-Reply-To: <20050715115650.I66818@ganymede.hub.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.8 required=3.8 tests=ALL_TRUSTED autolearn=failed version=3.0.2 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.0.2 (2004-11-16) on pooker.samsco.org Cc: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Subject: Re: FreeBSD 6.0-BETA1 Available X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 15 Jul 2005 15:18:54 -0000 Marc G. Fournier wrote: > > And, for "the stupid question of the day" ... how long before 5.x is no > longer supported? I'm just about to deploy a new server, and was > *going* to go with 5.x, but would I be better just skipping 5.x > altogether? Or are there such drastic changes in 6.x that doing so at > this time wouldn't be prudent? > There will be a 5.5 release this fall and possibly a 5.6 a few months after that. Per the standard procedure, the security team will support the branch for 2 years after the final release. There will likely be other developers who have an interest in backporting changes to RELENG_5 for some time to come, just as has been done with RELENG_4. So the earliest that RELENG_5 will be de-supported is late 2007. However Part of the purpose of moving quickly on to RELENG_6 is so that the migration work for users from 5.x to 6.x is very small. 6.x is really just an evolutionary step from 5.x, not the life-altering revolutionary step that 4.x->5.x was. It should be quite easy to deploy and maintain 5.x and 6.x machines side-by-side and migrate them as the need arises. We don't want people to be stranded on RELENG_5 like they were with RELENG_4. 6.x offers everything of 5.x, but with better performance and (hopefully) better stability. If you're thinking about evaluating 5.x, give 6.0 a try also. Scott